Peritoneal Dialysis in Orthotopic Liver Transplantation Recipients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In many dialysis programs, there is resistance to initiating peritoneal dialysis (PD) in liver transplant patients needing renal replacement therapy. This retrospective study reviews the outcome of PD in liver transplant patients at a major transplantation and dialysis center. METHOD: We performed a retrospective cohort study in patients who underwent liver transplants and received PD between 1991 and 2016. Patient demographics, laboratory parameters, and adverse events were collected from our electronic database. RESULTS: Between 1991 and 2016, 14 patients underwent liver transplants and subsequently received PD. The mean age was 59.0 ± 7.1 years; 42.8% women; the mean time from transplant to PD initiation was 9.7 ± 2.8 years; average follow-up on PD was 31.3 months (range: 9 - 87 months). Hepatitis C was the main cause of liver failure necessitating the transplant (8 patients). Calcineurin inhibitor toxicity was the lead cause of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) (12 patients). The overall peritonitis rate was 39.8 patient-months (0.3 episodes per year at risk). There was 1 patient with relapsing peritonitis, and 1 patient had severe peritonitis and died. Mean survival was 58.9 ± 11.3 months, 4 patients died, 4 received a kidney transplant, 1 patient was transitioned to hemodialysis due to poor ultrafiltration, 1 patient was transferred to another program, 2 remained on PD and 2 patients recovered renal function. Eight patients underwent liver biopsies during their time on PD without complication. CONCLUSION: There appears to be no specific concern related to liver transplant patients undergoing PD. Peritonitis and mortality rates were no different from other solid organ recipients or even from the general PD population. The hepatic graft was never threatened, even during peritonitis. Therefore, these patients should not be denied the option of PD.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".